Migration
#TheFutureIsYours Managing migration through a predictable, balanced and reliable system
It is imperative that the European Union hosts more refugees on its territory through secure gateways and humanitarian corridors. We must immediately put an end to the idea of a ‘fortress Europe’, where the foreign national is perceived as a threat. Furthermore, it is imperative to support and integrate immigrant people to ensure that they live in dignity and equality with all European citizens. The 27 states must accept a fair distribution of asylum seekers in order not to support reception in specific and more exposed border areas.
Report inappropriate content
Is this content inappropriate?
Please log in
You can access with an external account
29 comments
Conversation
Quite in agreement, it is enough to read and understand the coran to persuade itself. A short overview of the fact that our EU leaders do not read and look at religions in depth, do not understand their harmful and neurotic nature: Non-exhaustive list excluding hadîth: The coran treats non-Muslim animals (2: 171). The coran is a licence to kill (2: 191), a war declaration (2: 193). The coran supports sexism (2: 282), rape and slavery (4: 24), polygamy (4: 3) and misogyny (4: 34). The coran supports the confessional superiority and death of the apostats (4: 89), the murder (5: 33) the amputation of the thieves (5: 38) and the brain wash (5: 101). The coran supports the decapition of the infidels (8: 12) sectarism (9: 23) the genocide (9: 5) the discrimination (9: 28) and the forced conversion (9: 29) of the extermination of Jews & of Christians (9: 30)...
The coran supports offensive jihad (9: 38-39) terrorism (9: 111) hatred (9: 123). The coran holds slavery (24: 33) homophobia (26: 165-166) incest (33: 50) war (47: 35) torture (47: 4) violence (48: 29) paedophilia (65: 4), paedophilia (:). all this is repeated here & elsewhere in the coran, hadîth, mosques, buckles & the heads of the adepts themselves, as well as their ancient bowel, as long as they are the oldest, as well as warm, as long as they are alive, and as much as the ancient, as well as the aforesaid, as well as an athlee, and as much as they are, and as much as they are, as far as they have been committed, and as much as they are common, as well as they bear the brace (:) homophobia (:) the incest (:) the war (:) the war (:) torture (:) violence (:) Pedophilia (:) Pedophilia (:) Homophilia (:) Hedophilia (:) Hedophilia (:) Hedophilia (:) Homedophilia (:) Homedophilia (:)) incest all the war (:) the war (:) torture (:) violence (:) Pedophilia (:) Pedophilia (:) Pedophilia (:) Homedophilia (:) Homophilia promises to be protruded here: the war (:)) Torture (:) Torture (:) violence (:) Pedophilia (:) Pedophilia (:) Hedophilia (:) Hedophilia (:) Hedophilia (::)) incest (:) war (:) the war (:) torture (:) torture (:) violence (:) Pedophilia (:)) Pedophilia e (:) Pedophilia s (:) Hedophilie (:) Hedophilia (:)
There are already some 200 zones in France, which must be referred to as ‘no-go zones’. These zones, which are parts of large cities, already govern Sharia law. Serious mistakes have been made in France. Large migrant families have been promoted. Most of these families have little interest in education. For example, unemployment is rising from year to year. In the zones, a kind of civil war is already taking place if the police wants to arrest offenders. Then, in some cases, entire districts take action against the police. In some districts, only French social assistance is still in place, while anything else is governed by Sharia law. Whether these errors can ever be corrected? Therefore, there is no new immigration to Europe, only in exceptional cases for people who have to expect their death in their country of origin. Journalists, trade unionists, intellectuals opposed to the system. Such people will probably not want to abolish democracy in Europe.
Conversation
We should STOP accept Migrants, and this includes the refugees!
Between 2000 and 2010, Europe had a net flow of one million migrants per year, unemployment fell and the far right fell. The flow was suddenly divided by three from 2010 to 2015, even though needs increased. It is more than time for France and Germany to propose a relaunch of Europe and its integration model. This requires a debt moratorium and massive investment in infrastructure and training. In the absence of this, xenophobic pulsions are likely to leave everything.
Conversation
Without going into the excess, Europe can no longer welcome everyone: rising unemployment rates, insecurity among Europeans, communitarianism, etc. Not to mention the rise of right-wing populism, which reflects, among other things, a ras-le-bol of immigration. Your project would dream the Union from the inside.
First of all, it can be seen that the migration flow into the European Union (net of exits) was around 1,2 million people per year on average between 2000 and 2010. The figure may seem huge, but if it is reduced to a total population of more than 500 million, this is just over 0.2 % per year. At this very short time, the European Union was the most open region in the world (around 1 million migrants per year in the United States), and this was not a major problem: employment increased and unemployment fell in Europe, at least until the outbreak of the 2008 financial crisis.
Insecurity might be a valid point, not because the migrants are terrorist, but because it makes some people feel insecure.
The rising unemployment though is not caused by immigrants, rather by the continuing automation in our society. These jobs are not coming back no matter how many migrants you push out. This is a big problem we have to tackle!
Conversation
Yes, migrants should be installed in neighbourhoods voting for pro-immigration candidates. These neighbourhoods will then be able to see the real consequences of immigration!
And the other neighborhoods as well. So the others learn that immigrants are not a problem!
I agree to this experiment. If it turns out falsely, I will accept your side, I promise.
Dear Mr. Tuoissant, I support your proposal. But standing alone it is no viable longterm strategy. We have to develop concepts on how to change the game. We can not accept as a given that countries around us deteriorate from a prosperity, human rights, rule of law perspective. We have to actively move to change that trend. That is in the interest of the people in these countries and it is in our own interest.
What doyou think about this idea?
Create a level development partnership between EU and AU (African Union)?locale=en&order=recent
If Europe, and in particular the euro area, led by Germany and France followed a better policy (moratorium on public debt, economic recovery, investment in training and infrastructure, common corporate tax, Eurozone parliament), then our continent would have the means to be more welcoming, and would not have to compromise itself in indignous agreements, as with Turkey, and could try to transform the Mediterranean into a cemetery vask. In addition, we ask ourselves the origin of these migratory waves and our responsibility as a European towards them.
Conversation
I would even go further and set those secured gates even more open than you seem to do. But surely we should very energically fight the idea that "Europe will be submerged by migrants" and that "Europe can't feed the whole world". In fact, even with fully open gates, not so much more people will leave their homelands for Europe and even if there are more, Europe is more than rich enough to welcome them all and if they are permitted to work, they will even generate their own income and benefits for the country they arrive in.
We do already feed a big part of the world actually.
Conversation
As EU citizens we should never forget how privileged we are, and that this bears a human obligation to help others in need.
It is necessary that member states better share the efforts of receiving asylum seekers upon arrival at EU borders and do not leave this responsibility to frontline countries.
The EU should develop a joint approach to support the frontline countries to assure that asylum seekers are provided adequate care, assistance, and protection upon arrival and are quickly distributed evenly throughout the EU for status determination.
Furthermore, it should be considered to develop a joint fast and unbureaucratic procedure to assess the refugee status and create the necessary institutional infrastructure, which is in the interest of the member states and asylum seekers.
I also share the view that the root causes to leave their home countries should not be overlooked. The EU and its member states need to increase the efforts to make the countries of origin more liveable.
This conference should not be about any aspirations in the distant future, but rather about solutions to the most pressing problems at the moment. I therefore agree with you. The most pressing problem is the reception centres in the overcrowded countries of arrival. In addition to inhuman suffering, the aggressiveness of the overwhelmed locals is increasing. Only aid and cash donations are not sufficient. Only rapid transfer to the EU as a whole can remedy the situation. Of course, there are some EU countries which can host no or only a few refugees. They should be given the opportunity to do so by means of a
to contribute its moral and solidarity contribution, determined unanimously by the EU. In order not to overwhelm financially weaker countries, this amount could be offset against EU funding. In order to quickly relieve the burden on reception centres, identity and all necessary data should be identified only upon arrival in the host State. Under that provision, each State may decide on the right to stay in accordance with its own national laws. The distribution and monitoring centre as well as all additional necessary facilities will be taken over by the EU.
You are justifying the genocide of indigenous Europeans who, when asked, always reject these "refugees".
Agreed. The EU should values the human rights and respect especially
Article 1: "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood."
Article 3: "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person."
Article 14, paragraph 1: "Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution."
https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights
Either the EU will be a fortress against illegal migration or it will not exist anymore in future.
Hello, there are always human migration, but currently we are confronted with a shock of civilisation, a war of religion and filled with all the replacement of the population... Prisons are full of foreigners, insecurity is permanent in the suburbs, there is a societal confrontation in our streets... Little rapelle certain reality: 50 milions of European are without work.... We need manpower. Islamisatation of little whites is commonplace... The attempts are committed by Islamist musulmums... Young women are in danger on our streets... So, no thanks to an uncontrolled migration...
Discussions about mass-immigration only makes sense when you look at some facts.
Of the 5 continents Africa and the ME have the fastest growing population.
In Africa the population will grow from 1250 million to 2500, because of a birthrate of up to 7 child per woman. In the EU the population will be stable at 450 million with a birthrate of 1,55.
The UNHCR has registered 70 million refugees.
Africa ( 54 sovereign countries ) is a land with great prospects. It is 7 x as large as the EU and is rich in natural resources.
Succesful migration is only possible when there is a vacancy in the host country, and the migrant has the reguired qualifications.
But even then, to integrate a non-western immigrant in the EU cost Euro 167.000 .- per person.
Major Northern European cities have already a population consisting for more than 50 % of immigrants ( from 150 countries).
The unlimited mass-immigration is the greatest existential threat to the EU.
Even more so than the CO2 threat.
Jakob. Beautiful declarations. But they do not mention any responsibilties.
You should speak to the African citizen and their leaders.
They wreck their own country by their birthrates of up to 7 children per woman.
While only a birthrate of 2,1 is needed for a sustainable population.
It is not only a matter of feeding the children but also giving them a future when they grow up.
We have to draw some lines and tell the Africans to solve their own problems, like the Chinese, the Thailanders, the Indonesians, South Koreans did.
Conversation
Despite all – including historically justified – European co-responsibility for global migration, we must also consider possible limitations to the factual and political absorption capacity of our Member States. If our democracies lose stable majorities because of the negative attitude of their citizens, nothing will be won. Likewise, no one can really be integrated if, for example, they cannot be offered sufficient schools, KITAS, training places, or if they lack the necessary support/accompaniment. A system which distributes protection seekers to the Member States according to a fixed key cannot take these claims into account. That is why I propose that we let municipalities decide how many migrants they are willing to accept. The sum of these notifications then results in the number of protection seekers to be added at a given time. Experts believe that all those seeking protection for Europe today would also find a place here.
Only the municipalities alone may go a little too far or not enough for the solution as a whole. But municipalities willing to accept migrants should also be allowed to do so without further obstacles being put in the way by the EU or national governments or administrations. The cooperative municipalities should receive additional financial resources for the implementation of the support measures (housing, childcare, education, training, labour market integration, etc. of migrants) from the EU.
We Europeans need a migration solution in the spirit of the European Convention on Human Rights. We have actually overcome the previous thinking with foreclosure against people of other states, continents or other religions or skin colours or other distinguishing features in the united Europe. We create or maintain peace only through peaceful cooperation and with strict respect for human dignity. Corresponding actions are derived from this. Unauthorised and often inhumane or even life-threatening rejection at the external borders must no longer be a practice of Europe.
Promoting, organizing and directing mass migration is a crime against humanity. Lukashenk is currently committing exactly this heinous crime. But so is George Soros and his NGOs who are angaged in the very same hybrid warefare against Europe when they bring those migrants to our shores.
I agree on a fair distribution, so we need to review the Dublin III Regulation. This regulation has no need when we see the camps in Greece and their inhumanity...
I can't say better than Mr. Toussaint. In general, immigration is a source of wealth for host countries. However, four lines of action should be followed in parallel: — to act on countries of emigration where, in many cases, misguided and corrupt leaders lead intrinsically rich countries to ruin; — limit the time limit for examining applications for entry into the territory of the European Union to 60 or 90 days; otherwise, not only do applicants for immigration remain unworthy for years, but in spite of everything, they create a new life and it becomes difficult and humanely cruel to return them; — to organise the integration of migrants from a material and cultural point of view (knowledge of the language, of a minimum of history and acceptance of the laws of the host countries seems to be a minimum although many nationals are not there), — fight against inept propaganda of the “great replacement” type etc.
Loading comments ...